| Title |
Are cultural dimensions relevant for explaining cross-national differences in antibiotic use in Europe?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, June 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-8-123 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Reginald Deschepper, Larissa Grigoryan, Cecilia Stålsby Lundborg, Geert Hofstede, Joachim Cohen, Greta Van Der Kelen, Luc Deliens, Flora M Haaijer-Ruskamp |
| Abstract |
Antibiotics are widely-used medicines for which a more prudent use has been advocated to minimize development of resistance. There are considerable cross-national differences that can only partially be explained by epidemiological difference and variations in health care structure. The aim of this study was to explore whether cross-national differences in use of antibiotics (prescribed and non-prescribed) are associated with differences between national cultures as described in Hofstede's model of cultural dimensions (Power Distance, Individualism, Masculinity, Uncertainty Avoidance and Long-Term Orientation). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 29% |
| France | 1 | 14% |
| Korea, Democratic People's Republic of | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 57% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 29% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 199 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Uruguay | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 189 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 44 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 16% |
| Researcher | 25 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 17 | 9% |
| Professor | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 40 | 20% |
| Unknown | 31 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 56 | 28% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 23 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 23 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 40 | 20% |
| Unknown | 39 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 54. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 July 2020.
All research outputs
#691,299
of 23,342,092 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#148
of 7,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,280
of 83,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,342,092 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,812 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 83,384 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.